Cat and mouse Gillard stirring slush fund pot

Simon Benson

–,
Thursday,
November,
29,
2012,(6:27pm)

TONY Abbott on Thursday failed to make a case that Julia Gillard had acted in a manner unbecoming of a prime minister by allegedly lying over her involvement in the AWU slush fund scandal. And given the Opposition Leader has actually made the more serious allegation that the PM may have in fact committed a crime, the onus is on him to prove that she did.

But this was never the object for Abbott. To use the parlance of the pugilist, Abbott is an infighter, not a slugger. He doesn’t go for the knock-out punch. And in this fashion, while Gillard remains on her feet, the internal damage may have already been done.

Where Abbott succeeded yesterday was in delivering on his strategy of leaving Gillard’s leadership battered and bruised as parliament rose for its three-month summer recess.

Her plans of going to Christmas with her caucus solidly in her corner, and a new-year election agenda in front of her, have been left a bloodied mess on the political canvas.

And, with the greatest respect to the PM, she must wear some of the blame for the state of the scorecard. The PM has played a game of cat and mouse with the opposition and journalists over the AWU affair for months. While her defence does not qualify for a manner unbecoming, it has certainly been in a manner consistent with her training as a solicitor. She has used legal sophistry to answer questions.

There may never be a killer blow, the so-called smoking gun, as much as some may wish for one.

But the PM’s assistance in keeping this issue alive through her obfuscation on particular questions about it, has muddied the waters further and contributed to the perception of a cover-up.

And as every politician knows, it is the cover-up, not the alleged crime, that can be fatal. She has also failed to fully reassure the caucus, particularly given her reputation among colleagues for being an autodidact who under normal circumstances has an extraordinary recall for detail.

As a guide to understanding the strategy the PM’s office may have adopted in responding to this crisis, it is worth noting a missive published in the UK Telegraph last year under the title of John McTernan, the PM’s communications director.

“The key is to realise that you don’t need to tell the whole truth just nothing but the truth. Don’t lie. Don’t equivocate. But set out a defensible truth: one that you will not have to expand, modify or resile from,” he wrote.

“In all crises, there is a similar pattern. Some information will initially be suppressed, but it will dribble out, or be dragged out. In any event, it won’t be kept secret, and when it emerges, you will end up looking shifty or malevolent. Full disclosure is important, but speaking cynically, only of what will eventually come out.

“Be economical if you are sure some sources are utterly secure. Just be honest about what will become public, and don’t try to conceal it.

“In any scandal, there are some things it is impossible to evade; your only chance of survival will be to endure them.”

There is nothing extraordinary in this. It is pure political method. The problem is that the intention of the Coalition has always been broader than just this one issue and this strategy by the PM has played into Abbott’s hands.

His strategy has been to drag not just the PM but future leaders such as Bill Shorten into a broader narrative about the links between the Labor Party leadership and the sordid scandals gripping the trade union movement, namely those of the AWU and HSU and to a lesser extent the CFMEU.

Underlying all this is a sharpening of focus in the party machinery about Labor’s numbers and the election.

Six months ago, there was a view, a resignation in the party, that it needed to develop a strategy based on holding as much as it could and try for a respectable defeat. With the primary vote having recovered in the past two months, the mood has switched.

A senior Labor source posed the question to me Thursday.

“Can we win? It’s possible. But can we win with Gillard? I can’t see where she can win us seats.”

Labor doesn’t need to just hold seats to win the next election, it must regain seats, and senior people in the party are now convinced that Gillard will not be able to achieve this.

In NSW, it is an impossible dream, particularly given a scenario where the Nationals expect to pick up independent Rob Oakeshott’s seat of Lyne and Tony Windsor’s seat of New England.

Labor will need to compensate for these and then add to them when the reality is that Labor is in serious trouble in western and southwestern Sydney.

What does all this mean? The only possibility for Labor is Queensland.

It means serious questions are being asked now by people in the party machinery who had not seriously entertained the idea before: If Gillard can’t win seats for them, can Kevin Rudd?

Have Your Say

Simon, why would Abbott want to knock her out when it’s so much more fun watching her stumble around the ring, dragging, as you said, other potential future leaders into the bloody beating. If Labor were smart and they clearly are not, they would have removed her and thereby killed this issue off long ago.

Don’t you think that a truly innocent person would fight tooth and nail to do whatever it takes to set the record straight and clear their name? In Gillard’s case, this could require an open and honest statement to parliament, a Statutory Declaration, remove privilege from all related privileged documents, allow a Judicial inquiry etc etc. The fact that she doesn’t do any of these things, as well as the none answer to questions that she has been giving, speaks volumes about the status of her innocence. Don’t you think?

Gillard is a PM and no longer a Lawyer. She needs to start treating the parliament and the Australian people, her employers, with the due amount of respect and stop obfuscating and answer questions directly, openly and honestly.

Maybe a leader who is well liked can get away with “the key is to realise you don’t need to tell the whole truth just nothing but the truth. Don’t lie....”. Bill Clinton comes to mind.

Julia Gillard does not have the luxury of being well liked, she has lied to the electorate and that knowledge has not gone away. It has stigmatised her forever more. The whole of Labor has a problem with how it is perceived in the electorate and they are their own worst enemies. Recycling Kevin Rudd is not the answer for Labor as Rudd/Gillard are forever coupled in the electorate’s mind.

I suppose it depends where one sits as to whether or not Gillard won out today. I agree with Simon that Gillard has been damaged (left a bloodied mess on the canvas) and it is not only because of what happened today. I think that her current position began with Laurie Oakes posing difficult questions at the Press Club prior to the 2010 election. Her reaction, when viewed with hindsight, was sarcastic and dismissive.

We can add as we go along, the carbon tax promise, the back flip on pokies, the claim she knew nothing about removing Rudd, insisting her ministers told the media that there was no agreement with the Greens and the AWU questions. There has been enough mud thrown that a lot has stuck and regardless of her protestations, there are still questions that have not been fully answered.

There is the Thomson affair that was handled badly from the outset and the Slipper affair that was initially hailed as a master stroke but, as predicted, ended in tears. Moving to NSW, there is an ICAC enquiry that does not bode well for Labor as each day more and more is being discovered. Yes, Gillard can shoulder the blame for some of the problems but Brand Labor can also take some of the blame.

Great article. Gillard was gone for me when Bruce Wilson raised his head on the 7.30 Report. I had to associate her with this man in a “romantic” manner and believe me watching and listening to Wilson told me everything I needed to know about the character of Gillard. Watching and listening to her know just brings back that image of her and Wilson together with her friend Ralph Blewitt watching on! She is totally unbelievable now!

Come on Simon, Abbott’s not been trying for a knock-out? You’ve been watching a different “bout” from the rest of us because Tony’s been looking for the KO for the last two years. UNfortunately for him it looks like Peta Credlin and Julie Bishop haven’t been able to present it to him with a bow on top. Seriously, where’s the difference between this and Godwin Grech? Both times there have been statments made that haven’t got provable substance behind them. Smear and dishonesty seem to be the common traits and they even bring the role of The Australian’s Steve Lewis into question.

Gee Simon I am glad I am not as dumb as you appear when you write trying to defend the PM. I know you are just a Labor loving hack but please do not try and pretend that what she did in Parliament was a defence or answered the questions. She refused point blank to answer serious questions which if the circumstantial evidence is correct shows she has broken the law and breached her duties as a solicitor. Her blatant contempt for Parliament makes it very clear the PM is unfit to be in Parliament let alone the PM. But of course you are too blinkered to see the obvious just like the rest of the posterior sucker fish called the Canberra press gallery (more like the monkey cage at the zoo).

Thank you for your offensive comment. How is life on that other planet you live live on? I don’t know how anyone could construe the article as a defence of the PM. In saying that, it is not a defence of the Oppositon leader either. If you want a completely partisan view, there are plenty of other writers prepared to abandon impartial judgement, to whom you could turn to for comfort.

Simon BensonFri 30 Nov 12 (09:37am)

“To use the parlance of the pugilist, Abbott is an infighter, not a slugger. He doesn’t go for the knock-out punch.”

One point is that I believe PM Gillard has great memory recall. However, anyone who had thousands of pieces pass over their desk would at least remember what one did for family and Wilson was practically that.
At the very least she has shown a cavalier attitude towards her profession and her S&G;partners.

Comments are submitted for possible publication on the condition that they may be edited. Please provide a name, you may use a screen name – this will be published with your comment, and a working email address – not for publication, but for verification. The suburb/location field is optional.
( Read our publication guidelines ).